Orthodoxy Criticized

Critique and counter-critique is one of the hallmarks of a scholarly attitude, so it goes without saying that revisionists are taking their opponents’ arguments and responses seriously. Hence, this section addresses the theses of several orthodox scholars on the Holocaust which have evoked revisionist responses. Although most orthodox scholars insist that revisionist arguments are not even worth looking at, a number of them have in fact breached the taboo and have not only looked at revisionist arguments, but have actually deigned to criticize them in one way or other. The revisionist responses and rebuttals can be found here as well.



Holocaust revisionism is increasingly dismissed as a “conspiracy theory.” Two authors have turned the tables on revisionism's accusers and have analyzed the orthodox narrative as to whether it qualifies as a "conspiracy theory – and yes, it does.

Hitler’s Table Talk is a worthless primary source. There, I said it. And I’m not just saying this to evoke a reaction. I’m saying it because I really mean it. The renowned “Hitler expert” Lord Dacre, better known as Hugh Trevor-Roper, knowingly and willingly engaged in a massive cover-up regarding Hitler’s Table Talk (hereafter TT).  Had it not been for the outstanding research at the low cost of just $50 taken up by historian Richard Carrier,  we might still be in the dark about this, 64 years after TT’s first appear-ance in the English language. Sorry to bust this bubble, Hitler and Third Reich enthusiasts, but TT is worthless. In this article, I will establish three things: 1) that Hugh Trevor-Roper knowingly and willingly engaged in academic fraud for profit and prestige, 2) that TT is a worthless primary source, and 3) that renowned Hitler “experts”, both revisionist and mainstream, have failed the public regarding reliable Hitler primary sources.

British historian Laurence Rees, the former Creative Director of History Programmes for the BBC, has written a new "magnum opus": The Holocaust: A New History. This review lays bare a few of the shortcomings of this old wine in new wineskins.

Holocaust historians claim that the Holocaust is the most-documented event in human history. Holocaust revisionists on the other hand not only dispute this, but say that the storyline is full of contradictions and impossibilities. What to make of this?

Defenders of the Holocaust story have attempted to discredit scientific reports which disprove the existence of homicidal gas chambers at German camps during World War II. For example, Deborah Lipstadt’s defense attorney, Richard Rampton, referred in court to The Leuchter Report as “…a piece of so-called research which is not worth the paper it is written on…”

Dr. Richard Green states about Germar Rudolf:

“Owing to the fact that he actually has some understanding of chemistry, many of his deceptions are more sophisticated than other Holocaust deniers. […] Ultimately, he engages in the same deceptions and specious arguments as [Fred] Leuchter and [Walter] Lüftl , but the case he makes for those deceptions and arguments involves more difficult chemistry.”

This article will discuss attempts by chemists to discredit scientific reports which disprove the existence of homicidal gas chambers at Auschwitz/Birkenau during World War II.

Holocaust High Priest weaves together five compelling and interrelated narratives. The book’s main concern is to present the world’s first unauthorized biography of Elie Wiesel. It shines the light of truth on the mythomaniac who, in the 1970s, transformed the word “Holocaust” and made it the brand name of the …

Neither increased media propaganda or political pressure nor judicial persecution can stifle revisionism. Hence, in early 2011, the Holocaust Orthodoxy has published a 400 pp. book (in German) claiming to refute "revisionist propaganda." Mattogno shows with his detailed analysis of this work of propaganda that mainstream Holocaust hagiography is beating around the bush rather than addressing revisionist research results. He exposes their myths, distortions and lies. This book debunks basically every single gas chamber claim made for any of the German war time camps… 

The Auschwitz Museum is a mendacious organization, lying about the true nature of the Auschwitz camp both to millions of tourists – most egregious with manipulations to its main exhibit, the 'Old Krematorium' in the Auschwitz Main Camp – and to serious scholars – by way of obfuscating the true nature and meaning of documents in its archives. Here is the proof… 

German historian Prof. Dr. Christian Gerlach has written a major book on the Holocaust. The title suggests that it is about The Extermination of the European Jews, but as this review shows, the author has shirked the topic almost entirely, and he even found an excuse for doing so.

On the Holocaust Controversies[1] blog website, an article by a certain Roberto Muehlenkamp has appeared that attempts to refute, in part, the American edition of my study on the Bełżec camp[2], in particular Chapter IV entitled “Bełżec in Polish Archeological Research (1997 to 1999)”. This chapter contains …

Danuta Czech’s Auschwitz Chronicle are one of the most important secondary sources on the history of the Auschwitz Camp. The information found in it is a major basis for a large body of literature dealing with the Auschwitz Camp. All the more important it is, then, to verify whether the data contained in it is accurate. The following paper looks into the reliability of data contained in the Chronicle dealing with mass deportations mainly of Jews from all over Europe to Auschwitz in 1942. It compares the data contained in the primary sources quoted by Czech with what Czech herself claims about them.